Patstone & son 10 guage

[muddober]

Hammerslagger, your post was very informative. I noticed the clean break as well and your point is well taken that the gun may have not been right from day it left the factory. I also noticed that the chamber area was very thin. I am still stuck on the possibility that there was some obstruction yet I see no bulge ahead of the blow out because there is not enough barrel shown. The other possibility is it was a black powder shot shell and not smokeless, for had it been smokeless I would have expected to see the blow out further down the barrel where it is even thinner yet.

Lastly you could be 100% correct in that the barrel was defective from day one (no fusion) and if the barrels showed no signs of bulging that would evidence an obstruction, then it would be a very strong argument not to shoot a damascus barreled shotgun.

Ron

[Jim K]

Well, I can't pretend to the expertise shown above, but I will note that the injury reported by Hammerslagger is rather typical of the failure of "Damascus" barrel guns with modern ammunition. The reason is the pressure curve of smokeless powder vs that of black powder. The latter burns quickly and its peak pressure occurs with the charge not far in front of the shell where the barrel is generally thick. But smokeless powder is progressive burning, and its peak pressure occurs further out, and remains high just where the barrels of most older shotguns become thin. That, of course, is just where the shooter's fingers are gripping the gun and his forearm is alongside the barrel.

That is why when those old guns do blow, they tend to take fingers and other parts of the anatomy along with them. I have heard all the arguments put forth by muddober and others; one "gunsmith" told me that English "Damascus" barrels were much stronger than any solid barrels and would stand pressures up to 10 times that of a modern shotgun barrel. Pardon me, and no disrespect, but I call that nonsense and choose not to fire guns with any sort of twist or welded barrels and will continue to recommend againsf firing them.

Jim

[Tom Archer]

"I thank you all for your input. As for the barrels, yes they are damascus, but my gunsmith said they look good for shooting. He does not see any problem if I fire standard 10 guage."

Just for the record, the "standard" 10-gauge load available to the public when your Patstone was manufactured was a 1 1/8oz load, and the 1 1/4 oz load was considered the "heavy" 10-bore load of the period. In the day, a customer could special order extra long chambers, as Muddobber noted his 10-bore has; but most period 10-bores were shipped with 2 7/8" chambers. Winchester, Remington and Federal don't make those loads anymore; but you can purchase modern shells loaded to low "vintage" pressures from specialty manufactures such as Gamebore, RST, and others.

As for me, I also shoot my Damascus guns regularly for hunting and at targets; but I would NEVER shoot a modern 3 1/2" 10 gauge mag in a vintage 10-bore double gun. I once witnessed a significant portion of a man's left hand vaporized when a FLUID STEEL barreled LC Smith exploded because the left barrel was obstructed by a stuck fiber wad; and even though the odds are that I could get by unscathed should I take such risk, I think too much of my anatomy to take the chance. In my Damascus guns I shoot hand-loaded shells that I have loaded to pressures at 8000PSI or lower; these shells perform extremely well, and are loaded to pressure levels at which these vintage guns were originally intended to operate and handle. The higher pressure levels at which today shot shells are loaded are not required in order to cleanly kill game; manufacturers have loaded shells to higher pressure levels over the past 50-60 years in order to help most auto-loading shotguns function/cycle reliably.

There has been much written in recent years about the strength of Damascus barrels; and several years ago, author Sherman Bell published, in the Double Gun Journal, the results of his efforts to blow a set of worn and pitted Damascus tubes on a G Grade Parker 12-bore. He was eventually successful in that effort; but was amazed at how much abuse those barrel tubes absorbed before finally turning loose, as both absorbed pressures above 30,000PSI before exploding (both tubes ruptured in the chamber area as I recall). But as each fired shell represents a contained explosion; and since, as was the case with the Baker gun above, we have no idea as to the remaining integrity of any vintage gun barrel, personal safety concerns will always cause me to err on the side of caution.
Interesting discussion; and by the way Muddobber, please post a pic of your 10-bore Fox gun if it is an A.H. Fox gun. I've collected and researched A.H. Fox guns for years and have never seen a 10-bore; and although incomplete, remaining records and period catalog never show a 10-bore Fox gun as being built or advertised.

[Iron Eagle]

Muddober, that is one beautiful shotgun. Kicks like a Kentucky mule, I bet.

[deadin]

I'm not trying to hi-jack this thread, but it's not often one can find a group of vintage 10 ga. fans in one place.......
Anyway I picked up this little clutch of vintage brass 10 ga. shells and other accessories at a garage sale and have been trying to find out what I should expect to get out of them. (I have a guy in Florida that wants them and I have no idea what to ask.)
There are nine 2 5/8ths and one 2 7/8ths shells, all either Winchester or UMC Bridgeport. All seem in good, usable shape. There is also an adjustable oz/dram measure (1 to 2 1/4 oz. and 2 1/2 to 5 drams) no makers name.
A 10 ga. primer seater and a 10 ga. ring extractor (marked Bridgeport G.I. Co.)



Any help you could give would be much appreciated. (I tried looking in the usual places and values seem to be all over the place.)

Thanks,
Dean